The content in the following thread is purely the opinion of the author..
Some of our contributors want a thread on the sins of Frank Principi, Supervisor, Woodbridge Magisterial District, regarding the homeless. The story is in the News and Messenger. You will have to read it there. It is far too convoluted to summarize here. Basically, Supervisor Principi supposedly met with community leaders when he heard that a homeless shelter was way over capacity in hopes of finding solutions. The Chair, Corey Stewart moved into executive session at the last BOCS meeting and the problem was discussed. What has surfaced is a newspaper article that has more holes in it than a slice of Swiss cheese, rumor and innuendo about sex offenders being placed in schools with school children and Mr. Principi’s fiefdom.
For starters, Virginia Law is rather specific about what executive session can and cannot be used for. Mr. Principi is not an errant employee being taken to task for misdeeds. What was the justification for going in to executive session? (MoM might fill us in here on this one…calling on MoM!) Secondly, if a situation is discussed in executive session, why is it now in the newspaper? By definition, if a situation warrants executive session, isn’t there some responsibility to keep the content of the session private?
Thirdly, if the matter didn’t belong in executive session, where is the sunshine? A full disclosure with all the facts needs to be given to the residents of Prince William County. Right now, the issue is a whisper campaign on steroids and good people get hurt when this sort of story takes on a life of its own.
I certainly hope the supervisors were as ‘aghast’ when the Chairman ordered the Chief of Police back to his office rather than going to a scheduled town hall meeting to educate the immigrant community on changes in the county law. The Chairman also demanded that a laundry list of questions be answered in an hour’s time and acted on his own accord. Additionally, I hope that the supervisors were equally ‘aghast’ when they saw their private email to the chairman appear on a local blog (not this one I might add) without their permission, hours after it had been sent. There had not been sufficient time for a FOIA request to be made. The directive and list of questions to the chief was also on that same blog. Did any of them question the appropriateness of that behavior?
I smell a big election rat behind this story. Someone wants to get re-elected (best Jon Stewart voice). Whether Mr. Principi violated protocol or not, it sounds like his heart was in the right place and that he sought solutions to a very real problem involving real human beings. He looked outside of government fixing every problem and sought the resources of the community, the churches and the private sector. For that, he is to be commended. A simple discussion of protcol handles the other stuff.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Principi’s desire to personally effect Christian Charity is not something that he should be out there on the taxpayer’s dime with insufficient planning.
The article and the quote from stewart are very specific :
“Multiple county staff members have confirmed to me that Mr. Principi directed county staff to contact the Park Authority and work with them to remove the youth basketball league out of the Ferlazzo Building and put the homeless men in their place, some of whom are sex offenders,” Stewart said. “The board in its entirety was aghast at Mr. Principi’s proposition to kick out the kids at the Ferlazzo Building and replace them with homeless sex offenders.”
The episode almost exactly parallels Principi’s stance on illegal immigration. He seeks to negatively affect the rest of us so as to extend the most welcoming hand to people who don’t even belong here – even, as was happening, frustrate us to the point of moving out of town. For the sake of his personal self-image. I don’t respect this behavior. If he wants to give his own money, or open his own home up as an illegal flophouse or a homeless shelter, that’s one thing. Doing it with everyone else’s money is quite another.
I suppose we should be grateful that he didn’t start erecting chicken coops in the Ferlazzo Building, as are seen in his district.
So, having stated my opinion blankly, I’ll now move into sarcasm mode. Here are some of Principi’s future plans for his district, as well as any other districts he thinks that he can improve :
1. Close all public libraries and turn them into homeless shelters. The kids have wikipedia to learn from already; the libraries can best be used to serve the homeless. This move will have a practical side as well as the books can be used to heat the building during wintertime. When emptied, the bookshelf units will be donated to flophouse owners in principi’s district as basement dividers and as makeshift chicken coops.
2. Enable physical fitness among the homeless by letting them participate in high school PE classes.
3. Establish free needles and methodone clinics at middle schools.
4. Send flyers into DC and surrounding counties inviting all of their homeless to come to Prince William – since we are the one county devoted to providing resources for them beyond what churches and humanitarian organizations can provide. Mention the free needles and the option to participate in PE classes in the flyers.
5. Subsidize beds for the homeless at local day care centers.
Rick, do you really think that is a fair assessment of what went on? Sounds like too much dark side to me. Do you think the Gainesville District doesn’t have chicken coops and rabbit hutches? Talk to Lafayette.
I am more concerned about the process.
It is my understanding that the boys and girls club was asked about and that no one started moving anyone into the Ferlazzo building.
If you ask me who I trust the most to be truthful, Principi or Stewart, basing my assessment on past track record, do you know, without htsitation who I would pick?
6. Encourage the development of “tent cities” in open areas within our districts.
7. Co-opt all school playgrounds and turn them into non-policed zones, like “Hamsterdam” in Season 3 of “The Wire”, so as to encourage drug trafficking to stay within a defined geographic area. let kids out for recess into this environment only with signed permission slips from their parents.
8. Establish a program whereby citizens in Principi’s district, or what the heck anyone at all’s district, can turn in guns for certficates from Chick-Fil-A (TM). Eventually extend the program to include trade-offs for crack pipes as well.
9. Pair elderly citizens, many of whom don’t use much of the space in their homes, with day laborers who will agree to perform odd jobs in exchange for free room and board.
10. Subsidize construction of 19 more 7-11s per square mile in our districts, as the buildings are able to double as day laborer hiring zones. Formalize the partnership and provide contractors with cards and stamps which can be used to procure a free Slurpee with every 10 laborers hired.
And Rick, you are aware that Frank Principi has no control over illegal immigration? And you do know that he can’t drive around tearing down chicken coops any more than John Stirrup can? You are aware that if you call neighborhood services they will send someone to the house to check those coops out?
You are too smart to be regurgitating dark-screen-speak.
Well Moon-howler Stewart’s quote was very specific and Principi didn’t speak to the Ferlazzo building. And Stewart said “Mr. Principi directed county staff to contact the Park Authority and work with them to remove the youth basketball league.”
Either Stewart’s lying, or Principi and friends are covering up. Somebody’s a demonstrated liar here.
It’s always a mess when Sunshine laws are ignored. This is going to be such a nightmate to ‘fix’.
“And Rick, you are aware that Frank Principi has no control over illegal immigration? And you do know that he can’t drive around tearing down chicken coops any more than John Stirrup can? You are aware that if you call neighborhood services they will send someone to the house to check those coops out?”
Frank Principi deliberately fought against any and all attempts to provide disincentive to illegal immigrants here in PWC. It’s inaccurate to say that he has “no control” over it.
I shouldn’t have given Principi so many new ideas … here’s betting he tries to implement 7 out of 10.
Rick, Principi worked for due process. I don’t think that makes him pro illegal immigrant.
Outside of how those who were known illegal aliens would be treated (current policy) ,I don’t know of any other issues he has taken up that prove your point.
And what does that have to do with homelessness? I know Corey shoots off at the mouth. I would have to have the story confirmed by other people OTHER than Corey Stewart for me to believe Principi did any serious wrong-doing. Stewart is one person I simply do not trust. There has been too much slight of hand in the past.
Do you really feel it was ok for him to turn over emails and directives to an employee to a blog owner? I certainly would not have felt it acceptable for him to turn that over to me, if I had had a blog back in those days. That example there did happen and we all know it happened. That was a case of someone acting on their own accord for political gain, screwing over his colleagues.
Principi sure isn’t going to get gains from the votes of 51 homeless people.
Mr. Bentley
Talk about monopolizing a blog! Are you blue in the face yet?
“Kick out the kids…. and replace them with homeless sex offenders”. Sounds as if every homeless person is a sex offender.
I have monopolized also. Sorry. Everyone else gets a turn. I will shut up for a while. I am being redundant.
In fairness to Rick, he asked for the thread and I knew when I put it up he and I were going to disagree.
I am concerned with the process, rather than the person. This is typical me. And I think Rick is having a dark side kool aid flashback. One of those 2007-2008 episodes. 😉
Punchak, how are things over in your next of the woods? How are the clowns on your bocs?
So if Principi or someone else e-mailed you some type of e-mail proof that Corey Stewert was … hmmm, let’s say for the sake of this arguement bigoted (since it’s distasteteful but not illegal), an e-mail where he said “spic” or something – you definitely wouldn’t use that?
sorry punchak, I am very taken with my own jokes.
Not sure I am reading your right, Rick. Who is saying ‘spic?’ Corey or Frank, in theory of course. Ah, ok. No, I probably would not use it.
1. They were discussing an employee
2. Why give it to a blogger or reporter?
3. he also released a directive to an emloyee. He had no business giving the directive.
That is a little worse than whispering to the press.
rick, operative word is probably. I am not saying I would never use it. I might …it depends on why he used it. If it was a private email between 2 people, nah, I wouldn’t use it. And I feel the same towards Dog the Bounty Hunter. That was a private conversation.
If he used it as public policy…sure… I would probably use it.
I suspect that the problem was more likely an authority issue rather than the homeless issue. The Board of Supervisors only can take action as a complete Board, not a single supervisor.
A supervisor can not tell any department in the county to do this or do that in regards to a problem, no matter what good intentions they might have. The Board must act as a whole, then county staff acts based on the board’s recommendation.
Because the entire board seemed to be upset with Principi about this, I would speculate that he “instructed” county staff to do something rather than wait for the board to act formally. Proper protocol would have been to come up with a solution and then approach the county executive and the BOCS as a whole to sell them on his solution. Any protocol situation within the board would usually be handled in close session because of possible legal ramifications.
Although Principi was acting entirely based on his compassion for the homeless situation, the board still can’t allow him to do that anymore than they could allow another supervisor to instruct the building department to more an inspection ahead of schedule. It creates a situation ripe for abuse of power. What if one of the not-so-altruistic supervisors took things into their own hands with the planning department for example?
Good idea, good heart, poor execution of the idea.
Doing away with youth basketball to establish more homeless shelter is a good intention? I don’t agree at all.
Seriously? This ridiculousness of this just made me LOL:
“Multiple county staff members have confirmed to me that Mr. Principi directed county staff to contact the Park Authority and work with them to remove the youth basketball league out of the Ferlazzo Building and put the homeless men in their place, some of whom are sex offenders,” Stewart said. “The board in its entirety was aghast at Mr. Principi’s proposition to kick out the kids at the Ferlazzo Building and replace them with homeless sex offenders.”
Yep. Principi, that evildoer, planned to put the youth basketball league out of the Ferlazzo Building and replace them with homeless sex offenders.
Besides, we all know our kids are much safer when homeless sex offenders live in tents in the woods behind Rte. 1.
Good. Grief.
Grr, Grumble, Grouse (dig through my mountains of FOIA crap), I should be paid better than the County Attorney who apparently doesn’t get it. Not surprising in that I suspect the closed session issue was pushed either by Caddigan or Corey and in the interest of self-preservation, allowed by Principi.
It is VERY, VERY, VERY clear from both AG opinions and FOIA Advisory Council advisory opinions that the “disciplining” of Prinicipi IS NOT subject to closed session and should have been done in open session (see below excerpts from Advisory Opinion AO-17-03) Just once I wish our BOCS bothered to check the rules before blundering off into the wilderness, Captain Soundbite strikes again. Lastly, it seems that someone or more than one someone doesn’t understand Executive Priviledge as it pertains to closed session discussions. Had this matter been proper for closed session, the discussions about the details with a reporter are arguably actionable as well, Stupidvisors.
“Public policy seems to dictate that discussions of an elected public officer’s handling of business and decisions related to the public business should be held in open session. An officer is elected by the citizens he represents, and often times the only recourse for unpopular actions or positions is at the polls, where citizens vote to retain an incumbent or to elect a new representative. In most instances, public officers of an elected board have little or no authority to manage the day-to-day performance of fellow officers on the same board. A public officer chooses to place himself in the public light by running for office, and public scrutiny of his performance is an important part of the democratic process. If such discussion by fellow members of the elected body is held out of the public view, then the only people who have the actual power to remove a public officer — the voters — would be kept in the dark and not be able to make an informed decision at the next election. Furthermore, if the exemption at subdivision A 1 of § 2.2-3711 were used in such a situation, the public body would essentially be going into closed session to vent frustrations and discuss a situation over which it has no authority to act. It is the role of a public officer to make decisions and form opinions about issues of public policy that will best benefit his constituents. While other public officers of the same public body may disagree with and perhaps even criticize those decisions or positions, it is not generally their role as elected officials to punish or censure the public officer with whose opinions any or all of the other elected officials disagree. In fact, discussion or criticism about the prudence of a particular public officer’s opinions or actions as they relate to the public business may be the essence of the discussions that FOIA was designed to keep in the public light. Exemptions are generally created so that a public body may hold certain discussions that are necessary for its transaction of the public business, but that public policy allows to be held out of the public view. If a public body has no authority to discipline or censure one of its public officers, then such a discussion by the public body is not necessary and public policy dictates that such a discussion take place at an open meeting.
In conclusion, the relevant piece of the analysis for any closed session to be held under subdivision A 1 of § 2.2-3711 is whether the public body retains some level of control over the individual whom it wishes to discuss. This was clearly articulated by the Attorney General in the employer/employee context. However, the same analysis for determining the issue of control holds true when examining whether the exemption applies to a discussion of a public officer or appointee of a public body.7 If a public body has the authority to censure, reprimand or otherwise discipline a fellow member of the elected body, then it may exercise this exemption to discuss the performance and subsequent discipline of the member. If no such authority exists, then the exemption is not applicable. It is important to note, however, that even if the public body does have the authority to discipline a fellow member and properly convenes in closed session for such a discussion, no disciplinary action of the public body will become effective or official until its substance is substantially identified and voted on in an open meeting pursuant to subdivision B of § 2.2-3711.”
The issues seem twofold :
1. Principi was going to put groups of homeless people, including sex offenders, in public buildings without warning to the community
2. Principi wants to curtail children’s activities for the sake of helping the homeless. A bad decision. But kids don’t directly vote so i guess it’s easy to take away from them. And give it to the homeless – I want to tread carefully here, but most homeless are drug abusers of some type whose lifestyle choices dead-ended. You can pour all the resources you want at them, many will not rise up from their current state. Don’t take away children’s activities to do it, to enable your version of charity. It’s a very bad calculus.
M-H,
The discussions exempt from the open meeting requirments under
Virginia Code 2.2-3711A may not include what the BOCS apparently were
discussing in their closed meeting.
Part 1 does include “specific public officers” and employees, but
fairly sure that doesn’t mean elected members of the board. (“specific”
means individuals – not a class of employees).
Just checked the Board Rules to make sure I wasn’t shooting from the lip and didn’t see anything regarding the power to discipline or censure, so I’m pretty sure the Closed Session wasn’t legitimate. (see additional excerpt)
“In determining to which public officers the exemption applies, the opinion of the Attorney General discussed above relating to employees of a public body provides an important analogy. In that opinion, the Attorney General emphasized the importance of control in establishing an employer/employee relationship. There, a public body could not go into closed session to discuss an employee over whom it did have direct control to hire, fire, or supervise the day-to-day activities. In the public officer context, the element of control also seems relevant. Charters and statutes creating public bodies delineate certain powers and responsibilities to those public bodies. If a public body is given the power to assign or appoint certain of its members to perform delegated responsibilities, then it follows that the plain language of § 2.2-3711 would allow discussions of the appointment of a particular member to take place in a closed meeting.6 Likewise, if the public body has the formal power to discipline a fellow public officer, then a discussion of the performance of that officer and what disciplinary action to take could likewise take place in closed session. However, if a public body, such as a school as referenced in your question, does not have the authority or power to formally censure or otherwise discipline one of its members, then it follows that the public body cannot exercise the exemption at subdivision A 1 of § 2.2-3711 to discuss something over which it has no control, and upon which it can take no action, in a closed meeting.”
Thanks Mom and Poor Richard. So it seems that I wasn’t that far off base. The BOCS should not have gone into private session.
To all those who are saying what was done and what wasn’t done, I need to remind you that all of what you are saying is rumor. Have you ever known the News and Messenger to be in error? How about the kid who died and was later released from the hospital later in the day? Have you ever known Captain SoundBite to shoot a little loose? Noooo…tell me it isn’t so.
I think perhaps you all need to start questioning why the county attorney and the Board Chair and the rest of the supervisors allowed a sunshine matter to go behind closed doors and then allowed the press to get wind of it. To me, that is far worse than playing a little loose with getting homeless into various places.
I do not think any kid groups were moved and I do not think there are homeless men or sex offenders living in the Ferlazzo building. If I am wrong, please someone correct me with something more verifiable than Captain Soundbite’s leak to the press.
Isn’t Cheryl Chumley the one who put every county employ’s name and specific salary on a newspaper data base? Yea I trust her a lot. NOT.
Again, thanks to MoM and Poor Richard for their legal help!
Blah blah blah, lots of words, and honestly, the real issue has yet to be addressed. In these economic times, food banks and homeless shelters are inundated with people in need. Where does Corey get his facts that there are sex offenders? But putting all this political posturing aside, the issue is that there are human beings with no shelter. NOW, how about discussing the facts. Yeah, Principi might have handled this wrong, but in the scheme of public transgressions, not sure Corey should even be opening his mouth. Now, exactly, what is Corey’s suggestion to fix this problem? Stop leaking dirty laundry to the press on start working on solving problems.
The homeless these days is often a single woman with young children, not just single men. Times I’ve helped cook meals at SERVE, I’ve seen women of all ages and children from newborns up.
Churches in eastern PWC have done cold weather shelters in the past (one church one week, another church the next) but I don’t know if they did it this season though.
For those at the tipping point … there’s one more hour to the “House Rescue Fair” at the Boys & Girls Club in Manassas unit 8 pm tonight (9501 Dean Park Lane, behind Jennie Dean Elementary School off Wellington Road).
I am still speechless that no one seems to care that the BOCS completely acted inappropriately in their use of executive session and now everyone seems to running on rumors and Corey Stewarts remarks to the press.
Seems like the fox is guarding the hen house, doesn’t it?
I have a feeling Corey is going to shout from the rooftops, ad nauseum, his assertion that “he (Principi) wanted to kick out the kids at the Ferlazzo Building and replace them with homeless sex offenders.” He must think he has a winner with that meme, considering he said the same thing twice in the same paragraph. Doesn’t matter a whit if it’s true — he’ll run with it anyway. Such a small man, isn’t he?
“Isn’t Cheryl Chumley the one who put every county employ’s name and specific salary on a newspaper data base? Yea I trust her a lot. NOT.”
In defense of Ms. Chumley and other newspaper journalists, especially those at the News and Messenger, she does not make the decision to publish anything. As all reporters at that paper, she is assigned a story to cover and then she writes the articles for the topics she was assigned. She does not get to make any decisions as to what is printed or even what is covered. So that was the editor’s decision to publish those figures. The N and M has always had it out for the school system which is reflected in their OpEd pieces.
As far as this story, I do care if the closed session laws were broken or abused but I feel like we need more information to really say that is what happened. For example what is an employee was in trouble in relation to what happened and that is why they were in closed session? Then it would might be legitimate, although not very likely.
Before they go into closed session,the county attorney always cites the specific VA commonwealth code reference to why they are going into closed session,i.e. “legal”, etc. What code did the county attorney cite as the reason? That could be a clue. If it was the personnel clause I would give them the benefit of a doubt that there is more to the story and it involves improper behavior by a county employee. If it was the legal clause, I would be more skeptical. The legal one is the one they frequently abuse with the excuse that there was a possibility of a lawsuit therefore that justified the closed session. What does a “possibility” constitute?
Did anyone listen that day to what the attorney said right before they went into the session?
“Stop leaking dirty laundry to the press on (and) start working on solving problems.”
Amen! This is always the problem. Everyone spends all their time bashing everyone else’s ideas for solutions instead of spending time working together to come up with a good solution.
I haven’t trusted the “News and Messenger” for a long time. Dropped my subscription years ago. The editor there uses her position to attack people and groups she opposes and bolster her friends. It has no objectivity. I get local news from the Post (Buske seems to be trying to do a good job in PWC) and blogs.
Anona, Ms. Chumly wrote the original article and defended the paper’s decision to publish that information on individual teachers to the point of rudeness. She spoke as though she was part of the decision making. For that I will hold her responsible, even if she did not originally request the FOIA.
To have every single county employee listed by name is just poor taste. Salary grades no. But that action more or less stripped anyone working for the county of their dignity.
I did not listen that day. Mr. Principil cannot be treated as an employee since he is not one.
I would rather not hear Corey Stewart make another press release. I feel the board needs to speak publically at this point. This is not an under the rug situation.
MoM has it exactly right. Stewart routinely misuses the “closed session” option allowed under state code. If the county attorney were doing her job, she would prevent it from happening. No surprise Stewart would invent “facts” to grandstand. He does it all the time. More troubling is the BOCS returning from closed session and certifying its compliance with state code, when in this case it clearly was not.
1. There is no proof Principi made directives to any group.
2. The BOCS has not been particularly proactive with homelessness. Have we seen any additional funding go to shelters for expansion? I think not. Yet, our homeless population has grown.
3. Cindy is right that the majority of homeless are women and children. Many more homeless are Veterans. Some are substance abusers and the mentally ill, but statistically, are not violent. For sources, see http://luxuriouschoices.blogspot.com/search?q=plight+homeless.
4. We have not seen additional funding for Community Services Board for the mentally ill, either.
If we had these services, we would not be having this discussion about Principi because the problem would have been taken care of.
Finally, I am not surprised that closed sessions are abused. How else is the BOCS supposed to make up its mind before receiving feedback? We all know they do anyway. What others say rarely matters, unless you are a member of an anti-immigrant group.
It’s important to point out that the more money we spend on helping homeless, the more homeless we will have. I’m not suggesting that some help is not wise or humanitarian, but I am suggesting it needs to be limited and controls need to be in place (controls probably better effected by churches or private entities).
Well, it looks like the County Attorney has put herself out on an island given that advisory and AG opinions “aside” (opinion she was aware of) she and other local municipal attorneys interpret the law differently and her view is the closed session was legitimate. REALLY, I mean REALLY, are you effing kidding me. She is going to ignore the AG’s and advisory opinions and rely solely on her own and some merry band of local municipal attorneys interpretation of the statute. BTW, I’ve spoken to several local government attorneys and have yet to find one that agrees with her.
And the chairman gets to give the press release about what happened in executive session. Bizarro world.
And what’s even dumber is that everyone believed him. There is many a slip twixt the cup and the lip.
What has she actually said about the executive session, Mom?
Chech the BOCS video from yesterday at 4:01 into it. Complete disregard for the Advisory Council and the AG.
@Rick Bentley
The county also has had little investment in affordable housing. So how can we avoid having more homelessness?
I see Section 8 housing all around near where I live. What more is it you want to do?
How can we avoid homelessness? I don’t know. I just question the wisdom of committing additional resources to homeless shelters.
Though really the best way to avoid homelessness would be stiffer penalties for drug posession and for prostitution. Am i wrong?
What? The county has tons of affordable housing, and so does the City of Manassas. Especially last year – prices couldn’t have been cheaper – especially in places like Point of Woods for example (which admittedly is in the City of Manassas and not the county). You could easily have picked up a townhouse for $90K, and I’m not joking. If that isn’t affordable housing, I don’t know what is.
There was a Section 8 house across from me for several years when I lived in Point of Woods. Everyone knew it was Section 8 housing. The police were seen there rather often – seemed like domestic abuse incidents. I was momentarily happy when it ceased to be section 8. Then however it became a flophouse. Eventually it went into foreclosure in 2008 right around the time I moved out. I see it has been bought since then, but have no idea what it is like now.
I have a feeling that was not the only Section 8 house in Point of Woods, and I’m sure there’s still a few.
Speaking of that Section 8 house – a neighbor who ran an electrical business took pity on one of the tenants and offered him a job. A week went by, and that person stole a whole pile of copper wire and disappeared. The neighbor said he learned a valuable lesson: never hire someone who lives in a Section 8 house! Now, this was way back in 2000, when that happened. I don’t think you can normally find out if someone lives in a Section 8 house, but in this case the neighbor knew it, obviously.
Oddly enough, that house was quieter as a Section 8 house than a flophouse. At least people weren’t coming all hours of the day and night – honking car horns and making other noise – and when it was Section 8 there were only 4 occupants in it! I was just alarmed by how often I saw police at the house – but little did I know how much worse it would get when it turned into a flophouse (and was no longer Section 8)!
I should say however that prices have gone up in Point of Woods. You won’t now find anything there for $90K unless it is truly a dump. A year ago though that’s what I would have had to sell my townhouse for. Now I’m selling it for over 50% more than what I would have gotten it for. Also, my 2010 real estate assessment increased by 5.6% from 2009. Although, I find the assessment’s to be a bit inaccurate – in 2009 I would have had to sell my townhouse for 20-30% BELOW the 2009 assessment, now I’m selling my townhouse for roughly 20% ABOVE the 2010 assessment.
If all goes well, 8 days from today I’m officially no longer a property owner in Point of Woods! The only thing that can derail it now is a problem on the buyer’s end – getting financing or having money for closing!
Thanks Mom, I will check it later. I have to go out and do the Irish thing now.
Nothing devalues property like foreclosures and section 8, I am sorry to say. I am not even sure how section 8 works. But I know it devalues property.
Isn’t it a guarantee that your house will rent if you turn it over to HuD?